Find a Lawyer

MST. SAKINA BEGUM versus KHALID MUSTAFA

Section 3 (2) Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Section 12 (2) read with OX, Miscellaneous application filed under section 12 (2), approved in R13 Constitution application, A.X. The earlier decision read with the L, R21 CPC was set aside for the reason that since the Intro-Court Appeal was filed against the decision and has been dismissed, section 12 ( 2) An application under the CPC can only be filed as a hearing, before the Appellate Forum Intra Court Appeal's competitive record shows that the court's appeal was dismissed on a brief basis. Given that the appellants have no locus standi to hold a file, the implication of the improper decision on all the principles of integration was not cited, in the circumstances, would not apply and under section 12 (2). The application, which was disputed before the CPC Civil Court, was, for all intents and purposes, an application for the separation of the prayer of a previous Parliament decision to be re-processed on the grounds stated therein. Under the meaning of O IX, R 13, the application of the CPC was on constitutional proceedings and it was stated that the request should be given such opinion that the order was passed in the miscellaneous application, it cannot be said That it is approved in the exercise of the original jurisdiction. And since such an intra-court appeal was not authorized, it was dismissed because the single judge did not pass such an interim order, applying the jurisdiction authorized under Article 199 of the Constitution, as stated above. The application was approved for approval. Permanent prayer decision lawer from fb area from Nowshera Cantt lawyer